Sunday, March 31, 2013

Every Easter I post a work of religious art for the occasion. Usually it's a painting, but this year it's a sculpture. I give you one of my favorite underappreciated works of the great Michelangelo: his beautiful, triumphant Risen Christ (1519-21) in marble, now in the Church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva in Rome. By the way, Michelangelo's work is a heroic nude; the bit of drapery was added later in the Baroque period.

Apparently some traditionalists were scandalized by Pope Francis's inclusive take on an old ritual. Well, good for the Pope if he did it to lead by example! I seem to recall that some establishmentarian religious traditionalists were scandalized by the behavior of one Jesus of Nazareth, back in the day. (Who did he think he was, hanging out with tax collectors and prostitutes?)

Thursday, March 28, 2013

All I'm going to say is, THANK GOD we have new March Madness games again! I'm pretty much an exhausted basket case from the last couple days. I don't want to hear about academics, politics, Supreme Court decisions, various people behaving like jackasses, or anything else. I'm going to watch college basketball tonight until my eyeballs bleed. Thatisall. Join me.

Monday, March 25, 2013

From the mess about oversight, regulation, and press freedom in the UK comes a moment of clarity from The Spectator:

It is just as the advocates of press freedom feared: politicians cannot stop themselves. Give them control over print and they’ll come back for digital. Next they will want to distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ journalists, to reward their friends and punish their enemies. Just a whiff of this sort of power has intoxicated Alex Salmond, who commissioned a review which recommended that Scotland make licensing of the press compulsory. His devolved government would license bloggers, a handy tool in the run-up to the 2014 referendum. He was forced to drop the plans after they caused an uproar, but his intention was clear.

Perhaps the general public think state regulation is a good thing; that hacks should be restrained by people who aren’t themselves in the media. But what may not be appreciated is the insidious influence politicians already try to exert over the press: the quiet words over dinner, the phone calls made to editors, myself included. I have been asked to chastise ‘irresponsible’ reporters and remove articles that politicians find insulting from the website. On minister called to ask if I was aware that a Spectator journalist had been rude about him without first seeking the advice of his spin doctor. It’s as if MPs have lost sight of what a free press is for.

When the public think of a ‘bad journalist’, they imagine a hack who plagiarises, lies, or in some other way breaks the law. When a politician thinks of a bad journalist, more often than not he imagines someone who has criticised him, unfairly in his opinion. So of course there’s political lip-smacking about an era in which politicians have the power to define what is acceptable journalism. Or, as Labour’s Jim Sheridan put it on Tuesday, expel the ‘parasitical elements’ within the press. But this is an attack on freedom.

Um ... ewwwwww. When the term "grave robbing" appears in any article, the "ick" factor instantly multiplies by a factor of at least 10. Imagine the response from feminists when they discover that women are being trafficked as objects and commodities even after they're dead!

First, look at the map. To Iraq's east lies Iran and a border of several hundred miles. Had we kept the residual presence in Iraq we would have had a listening station on Iran's border. The Iranians knew this, and that was why they were eager to push us out. The Iraqis were more than willing to have us stay without advertising it. We squandered that possible advantage. The Iranians would have had to think things over if we were so close to them and right on their border.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

The movie is pretty much just an animated version of the its poster: all flash and no depth. Neither fully guilty pleasure nor truly incisive storytelling, Magic Mike shows us a lot of muscles while neglecting the two most important organs of all: the heart and the brain.

... historians are obliged to explore the viewpoints of elite actors, however unattractive, not to parcel out sympathy in proper proportions, but to show, in a faithful account of the past, the interconnectedness of the rulers and ruled, and of all strata of society, and how one group’s experiences influence another’s. But Zinn reduced historical analysis to political opinion. He assessed a work of history by its author’s partisan loyalties, not its arguments about causation, influence, motivation, significance, experience, or other problems he deemed “technical” in nature.

... the fatal flaw of Zinn’s historical work is the shallowness, indeed the fallaciousness, of his critique of scholarly detachment. Zinn rests satisfied with what strikes him as the scandalous revelation that claims of objectivity often mask ideological predilections. Imagine! And on the basis of this sophomoric insight, he renounces the ideals of objectivity and empirical responsibility, and makes the dubious leap to the notion that a historian need only lay his ideological cards on the table and tell whatever history he chooses.

I don't need to tell you how dangerously enstupidizing this is. The "nerds behaving badly" tag belongs to Zinn, of course, whose book has warped countless impressionable readers and still makes life harder for honest, responsible teachers of history.

This is not really about Cyprus, of course, but about the precedent that is being set there. In exchange for an infusion of capital into the nation's banks, Cyprus is being asked to impose a "special bank levy" ... This is described as a "wealth tax," except that it's not a tax. A tax is a regular rule that operates uniformly according to a pre-determined formula. A one-time, ad hoc seizure of money isn't a tax. It is confiscation. Or we can use a plainer word for it: theft.

If you want a Puckish application of this whole mess, I give you the incomparable Instapundit, who recently suggested:

... an enterprising GOP member of the House or Senate would introduce a bill immediately to make such shenanigans illegal — and dare the Dems to oppose it.

Put those Dems on the defense. It's a brilliant idea ... which means establishment GOP leaders and pseudo-cons will be too stupid to adopt it. Hey, Rand Paul, are you listening?

Here's some fascinating forgotten history, a tale of two siblings. While one brother joined the Nazi Party, the other helped Jews during the Holocaust. Meet Albert Göring, the younger brother of Hermann Göring. Yes, that Hermann Göring.

"The establishment of the principle that a government can, and at times of economic strain must, help itself to your savings, and that this is a legitimate tool of statecraft, ought to provoke riots. I am amazed at the tranquillity with which it has been accepted so far."

Perhaps there aren't any riots yet because everybody is right now busy sprinting to the ATMs. Hell, I would! Once folks figure out that they can't get to their money, then I'll expect panic to turn into rage.Hey, remember all that crazy talk about how cash-strapped governments might start raiding people's retirement accounts? Doesn't sound so crazy now, does it? Meanwhile, all those jokes that the Cine-Sib and I used to make about putting your money into your mattress instead of a bank ("Haha, I'm sure my Sealy Posturepedic can give me a better interest rate") now aren't so funny anymore.Anyway, the thought occurs to me as I watch Cyprus: the leadership in the euro zone could scarcely do a better job of crashing that country if they were trying to do so. I mean, look at what's been done in the name of "saving it." When you spark panicked bank runs in the name of saving anything, I think it's fairly safe to say that you've screwed the proverbial pooch.PS:Interesting (and prescient) anecdote.

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Full lyrics are here. Besides, some people like this clinical professor of psychiatry think beer gave us civilization. Enjoy your festive (green-tinted?) beverages responsibly, my darlings, and enjoy this video too!

Everybody remembers the Irish potato famine of the 1840s, but has anybody wondered lately just what kind of potato was behind it all? Here's the fascinating tale of a curious Irish farmer who decided to try growing this bit of history. (Kudos, sir!)

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Bernard-Henri Lévy takes on Hugo Chavez and the useful idiots who are his fans. Here's a taste of it: "to pretend that the overall record of Chavezism has been positive is an insult to the Venezuelan people."

All best wishes to the new Pope Francis. Wow, that conclave didn't waste any time choosing Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina, did it? It's a historic moment of firsts: He is the first Latin American and the first Jesuit to become pontiff, and he chose a papal name that had never been used before, to boot.The new pope's first official tweet:

Short version: you don't need the former in order to have the latter.So tell me, ye judges of authenticity: am I "authentic" enough for you? Maybe my smartphone and laptop and high heels disqualify me as a "proper" Taiwanese. Should I be back wading in the rice paddy and wearing a coolie hat with a baby strapped to my back? Does that better meet your laughably ignorant expectations? Would it make you feel better if all the businesspeople and computer engineers of Taipei knock down the high-rises and go back to living in villages? trade in their cars for wagons and water buffalo again? ARE WE ANY LESS TAIWANESE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT POOR? How insulting.Oh, and heaven forbid that anyone say that the greater issue is whether quality of life is better. Let me tell you: on my last visit to "the old country," one of my elderly aunts started telling me about life 50 years ago when she knew that "culturally authentic" poverty firsthand. I won't weary you with details; suffice it to say it was horrifying and included phrases like "no running water" and "no indoor plumbing." Then she smiled, gestured around her comfortable modern home, and said, well, thank goodness that's all over with! Indeed.Lord, give me patience with those horrible people who argue about "authenticity" ... or, better yet, Lord, give me the self-control not to punch them in the face. Why, one might even think the authenticity police's breathtakingly arrogant behavior is ... raaaaaaaaaaacist or something.OK, OK, how about something like this for a solution? Wealthy tourists want to see "authenticity" from the ethnic locals while the ethnic locals want a better life with modern advances. Why not take a hint from the brilliant Gary Larson's cartoon?

I was actually going to get around to this, but someone else has saved me the work. Here, read this. I'm on the record as loving this movie, but if I had to point out the one thing that bothered me, the fly in the ointment, it was the intro that purported to give the audience the historical background to the crisis of 1979. The whole thing was only a few minutes long, but I hated it. Still, the rest of the movie was absolutely splendid storytelling. The creative liberties taken for the plot and its fantastic drama were fine by me. It was the intro that rubbed me the wrong way, because I'm sure it's given a whole bunch of ignorant moviegoers a totally wrong idea of what happened. Well, we should all know better than to expect actual history out of Hollywood, for goodness sake. But you knew that already. I have to say, though: What may be more remarkable - and worthy of praise in this age of "America is always the bad guy" media - is the fact that the movie does not attempt to make the Iranian hostage takers sympathetic. It does not glorify them at all. We are clearly shown the revolutionaries' brutality not only to the captured Americans but also to other Iranians. I think the flick deserves some kudos for that.The writer of the article is also quite exercised about the Jimmy Carter epilogue to the film. I can understand his annoyance, but I thought Carter's voiceover spin-doctoring was so flat-out ludicrous that I just laughed it off. Come on, all Jimmy's done lately is try to revise his (disastrous) legacy. Nobody mentioned Ronald Reagan at all in connection with the end of the Iran hostage crisis, but he was the elephant in the room and was conspicuous by his absence.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

I was trying to write an honest-to-goodness analysis of the filibuster (I meant to include links like this, this, this, this, this, and this in my discussion of how even though I don't agree with Rand on a number of things in general, I was overjoyed to see him "hack" politics and bust out of the business-as-usual DC opacity to engage a much wider audience ... When was the last time you watched C-SPAN in delight while social media exploded as a conversation about civil liberties took off? Be honest. Never), but in the end, my congenital inability to resist a joke has overpowered me. You may enjoy a rather more visual explication, gentle reader?

How Twitter, Facebook, and social media responded:

How Rand Paul fans see him and the filibuster:

How John McCain and Lindsey Graham see Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and everybody else who rallied to Rand:

How McCain and Graham see themselves:

How Rand Paul fans see McCain and Graham:

How C-SPAN sees Rand Paul:

How libertarians hope this conversation about civil liberties, limits of executive power, and government overreach turns out:

I missed this when it was in theaters, and that was my bad, because End of Watch is a great flick (hey, it's by the writer of 2001's excellent Training Day!) rating 85% on RottenTomatoes. Come for young hotshot LAPD officers Taylor (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Zavala (Michael Peña) as they go on duty in gang-and-cartel-ridden South Central LA, but stay for a surprising dose of humor and engaging depiction of personalities. I was expecting a gritty crime drama with lots of action, and the flick is definitely that, but it is also, at its core, a buddy movie in the best sense of the term; it's a flick about two cops who are as much brothers as partners, and as riveting as they are when they're chasing criminals, they're even better when they're just interacting with each other (these guys have some of the best on-screen chemistry, banter, and badinage I've seen in recent memory). Gyllenhaal is great and Peña simply superb as they create their characters as touchingly real individuals who make you care about them even through (or even because of) all their flaws and foibles and locker room language as they go out day after day into a dangerous world. You can keep your insipid rom-coms, Hollywood marketing-to-girls department. I would rather watch movies like End of Watch any day. End of Watch runs 109 minutes and is rated R for violence, language, drug use, and disturbing images.

I hope my efforts help spur a national debate about the limits of executive power and the scope of every American’s natural right to be free. “Due process” is not just a phrase that can be ignored at the whim of the president; it is a right that belongs to every citizen in this great nation. I believe the support I received this past week shows that Americans are looking for someone to really stand up and fight for them. And I’m prepared to do just that.

Steyn is always worth your time. Here are two tastes of his latest: "the government is too craven to stray beyond technological warfare and take on its enemies ideologically" and "government is increasingly comfortable with a view of society as a giant “Panopticon” — the radial prison devised by Jeremy Bentham in 1785, in which the authorities can see everyone and everything."

The filibuster succeeded precisely because it wasn't a cheap partisan ploy but because the substance under discussion - why won't the president of the United States, his attorney general, and his nominee to head the CIA explain their views on limits to their power? - transcends anything so banal or ephemeral as party affiliation or ideological score-settling.

Wednesday, March 06, 2013

... that somehow out of the filibuster we might get a new GOP that focuses on freedom, liberty, limited government, and American optimism? that presents a shining vision of America in opposition to the miserable pettiness of the status quo and its power-grubbing mandarins? OHGODPLEASE. Paul, Rubio, Cruz, et al are making me dare to hope a little. It's terrifying and exhilarating all at once. Let it start here with the pushback against the abuse of power. As Rand Paul just said, this isn't about Republicans or Democrats, but about executive power and the US Constitution.UPDATE: It's 11:40 PM, and we're all still up and a-filibusterin'. How much longer can everyone keep going? Honey, grad students don't sleep as a matter of course. We're in for the long haul (while doing schoolwork, natch). (Meanwhile, I note that a bunch of other people are finally showing up on the Senate floor to jump on Paul's bandwagon. Shamed into action, eh? GOOD. Do the right thing for the wrong reason, eh? So long as the right thing gets done in a snakepit like DC.)

The spectacle of Rand Paul's filibuster today (still going as I type, with 10 Senators involved now!) has been eating up the news, so I'm not going to babble much about it here other than to say that it's pretty darn awesome. It was high time somebody poked the establishment in the eye about this. I think you all might also appreciate this observation that just appeared via Twitter:

That awkward moment when your Nobel Peace Prize-winning President won't promise not to kill US citizens. #StandwithRand— Jary (@Jary798) March 7, 2013

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA. I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court, that Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Ky., is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country.”

Back in my teaching days, many years ago, one of the things I liked to ask the class to consider was this: Imagine a government agency with only two tasks: (1) building statues of Benedict Arnold and (2) providing life-saving medications to children. If this agency’s budget were cut, what would it do?

The answer, of course, is that it would cut back on the medications for children. Why? Because that would be what was most likely to get the budget cuts restored. If they cut back on building statues of Benedict Arnold, people might ask why they were building statues of Benedict Arnold in the first place.

I don't know what's more ridiculous: ex-basketball player and full-time freak show Dennis Rodman, Rodman's bromance with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, or the fact that some guy from State actually had to say this at a press briefing:

"Dennis Rodman has never been a player in our diplomacy, he does not represent the views of the United States, he is a private American."

Gentle reader, in this nightmarish post-sequester hellhole wrought by 2.3% budget cuts, I have taken a minute from cannibalizing my neighbors, burning books to keep from freezing to death, dodging airplanes plummeting from the sky, and fighting off zombies in order to bring you this hilarious video:

Friday, March 01, 2013

Language warning, but well played, sir. Hooray for some academic freedom! I'm sure the title also reflects the amounts of frustration that go into every published article, not just those in linguistics!